In-House Watch Movements

The Watch Snob Reveals The Truth About In-House Watch Movements

In-House Watch Movements

Dear Watch Snob,

I am looking to purchase my next timepiece, and I am interested in the Royal Oak Chronograph 41mm in steel, especially the classic blue face model. I understand AP is a brand renowned for their movements, but I was disappointed to learn that the movement in the chronograph Royal Oak is indeed an outsourced F. Piguet movement, not designed in house by AP. One would expect the movement of a luxury timepiece, especially one by the brand of Audemars Piguet, to at least develop their own in-house movement, no? Your thoughts on this and the watch in consideration would be greatly appreciated.

There is what one would expect and there is what one should expect and ne’er the twain shall meet, at least in the case of many who insist on continuing to beat this most dead of horological horses. If I never see another question about a so-called in-house movement again it will be too long. I realise that the art of writing for a so-called mass audience is to a great extent the art of repeating oneself without seeming to, but for heaven’s sake, come on.

OK, here it is again: whether or not a movement is a so-called in-house movement is possibly the single most unimportant thing to consider when considering buying a watch. The quality of the design, quality of materials, care taken in construction, degree of finishing, and degree to which the watch has been adjusted to perform as it should, are all far more interesting and worthwhile things to consider. There are an absolutely fantastically huge number of watches with outsourced movements that are finely made and need touch the lock to no one, and there are any number of watches with in-house movements that are far more egregious examples of slipshod design and sloppy construction than anything kept ticking by a heart brought in from (gasp!) the outside. It is not whether a movement is in-house or not that matters; rather it is what happens to it in the house in which it ends up.

May I suggest you all write that down?

Now, to be fair, you have asked a question many ask at a certain point in their horological education and let me make amends for venting my spleen by noting that in this particular case, Audemars Piguet may be justly thought to be a bit shirking their duty -- to their clients and to themselves. I should clarify by saying the movement you instance is a perfectly fine one (as is the watch; much more attractive than the grossly hypertrophied Offshore, an eternal testimony to the triumph of bombast over taste) however for Audemars Piguet to, at this point, in the Year of Our Lord 2014, still not have a simple, high quality, in-house chronograph movement beggars belief, and yes, I’m aware they make very complicated movements with a chronograph, but that simply makes their refusal to make a good work-horse in-house chronograph movement all the more puzzling. For God’s sake, even that model of intractable Helvetian lethargy, Patek Philippe, finally managed to stir themselves to cough one up.

Jules Audemars Extra Thin

Dear Snob,

I don't know that much about watches. I've owned an Omega Speedmaster for the last 20 years, but am now looking to buy a dressier watch, primarily for wearing to work, where I often interact with people who would notice which watch I was wearing.

A good friend of mine recommended the Jules Audemars Extra Thin (number 15180) and I wanted to get an expert, unbiased view on this watch. I do like the looks but I don't know very much about it. What are its strengths and shortcomings?

If it matters at all, I'm tall and thin (6'6" and 90 kgs.).

Now here is a perfect case in point; the movement in the Audemars Piguet Extra Thin did not begin life as an “in-house” construction but it remains one of the most historically important and attractive ultra-thin automatic movements ever made. AP calibre 2120 is a self-winding movement that was originally made available in 1967 and has been used (with varying designations) by Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet and Vacheron Constantin; it is even today the thinnest full-rotor automatic movement ever made; it has a clever and very attractive outer rail to support the rotor; and so on.

There is everything to like about both the movement and the timepiece. You may come to regret getting it if you get one -- such is the nature of the fickle human heart -- but it won’t be because there is anything intrinsically wrong with the watch.

The only potential caveat here -- other than the fact that this is a movement that should always be serviced by someone familiar with its idiosyncrasies -- is that you, sir, if I may make so bold as to be somewhat familiar, are a gentleman of idiosyncratic proportions. The watch is 41mm in diameter; your considerable height and enviable slimness may make it a bit diminutive for your lanky frame but that is a matter easily settled by visiting a stockist and trying one on.